Jump to content

Lets talk facts


britishranger

Recommended Posts

When I first started watching MMA wrestling was hardly an issue it was more BJJ vs Striking and it was damn exciting. Then it evolved and kept evolving to the point where MMA is a Wrestling DOMINATED sport and a lot of people find this kind of MMA boring like I do. Now my question is ,If MMA,s Growth can be traced back to the fights between Liddell vs Couture ,Liddell vs Ortiz, Ortiz vs Shamrock, Forrest vs Bonnar etc etc etc I cannot remember one wrestlefest becoming a classic match remembered by the masses or bringing in new fans. I am all for wrsetling in MMA but not to the extent where one fighter is happy to use wrestling to lay on top of their opponent for a points win. Now the question I ask seriously is Will wrestling stop the growth of MMA Serious answers please and explanations why your opinion is what it is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no. and i dissagree with most of what you said. back in the day wrestling was a much bigger problem than it is now. because most fighters had wrestling skills but nothing to back it up with. 90% of most fights where spent in a complete stalemate on the ground. no improving position no effective ground n pound and no submissions attempts.

 

nowadays its rare to see a stalemate on the ground and when you do it gets stood up. just because lots of new fans or idiots as i like to call them yap on about Lay n Pray doesn't mean anything. RASHAD HAD A BETTER GAME PLAN GET OVER IT.

 

look at randy's fight with tito for a wrestling classic, or maTt hughes early fights. look at any fight that ended in vicious ground n pound or submissions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first started watching MMA wrestling was hardly an issue it was more BJJ vs Striking and it was damn exciting. Then it evolved and kept evolving to the point where MMA is a Wrestling DOMINATED sport and a lot of people find this kind of MMA boring like I do. Now my question is ' date='If MMA,s Growth can be traced back to the fights between Liddell vs Couture ,Liddell vs Ortiz, Ortiz vs Shamrock, Forrest vs Bonnar etc etc etc I cannot remember one wrestlefest becoming a classic match remembered by the masses or bringing in new fans. I am all for wrsetling in MMA but not to the extent where one fighter is happy to use wrestling to lay on top of their opponent for a points win. Now the question I ask [b']seriously[/b] is Will wrestling stop the growth of MMA Serious answers please and explanations why your opinion is what it is

 

Wrestling has been the most dominate style of fighting in MMa. There have been far more wrestling champs than any other fighting discipline in the game.

 

No. It shouldnt be banned.

 

If you can get him off you, then you are losing the fight....thats called reality, and you should have trained harder in that aspect.

 

I think once fans understand it, they wont mind it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a couple of problems with wrestling - I dont like the fact that Wrestlers can come into MMA and be successful with very little experience in other martial arts (that guy in TUF who has only been training for 6 weeks had a lot of success against a much more experienced fighter) but I guess its more an annoying fact of life more than a problem, I'm into Muay Thai and a Muay Thai fighter has to do a lot of work in the ground game to make it in MMA (call it sour grapes) and my other problem is top wrestlers are generally fighting fighters with limited wrestling skills and I dont really like one sided fights a la GSP vs Hardy.

 

I think we are just in a process of fighters scrambling to get their skills up in Wrestling and that part of the game will subside a bit when they do and TDD's are improved. It will eventually mean that MMA is better in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this for me is why judo and bjj is better than wrestling. once you take a guy down you can submit him or ground and pound. wrestlers can learn submissions but only so they can defend them most of the time. judo/bjj is more entertaining to watch and adds an extra dimension to your game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nobody says oh people can't stand with great strikers so we should get rid of it, Wrestling is about control and if you come into a fight against a great wrestler and aren't ready for it, then you deserve to lose. Its not a fighters job to choose his styles based on what his opponent can handle, It's up to both fighters to be prepared for everything the other guy has, Hardy didn't train take down defense, Rampage went to wolfslair, they deserved to lose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nobody says oh people can't stand with great strikers so we should get rid of it' date=' Wrestling is about control and if you come into a fight against a great wrestler and aren't ready for it, then you deserve to lose. Its not a fighters job to choose his styles based on what his opponent can handle, It's up to both fighters to be prepared for everything the other guy has, Hardy didn't train take down defense, Rampage went to wolfslair, they deserved to lose[/quote']

 

Rampage going to Wolfslair had nothing to do with it - thats stupid statement, and yeah I bet Hardy didnt even bother with his TDD!! he was fighting GSP ff sake

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no. and i dissagree with most of what you said. back in the day wrestling was a much bigger problem than it is now. because most fighters had wrestling skills but nothing to back it up with. 90% of most fights where spent in a complete stalemate on the ground. no improving position no effective ground n pound and no submissions attempts.

 

nowadays its rare to see a stalemate on the ground and when you do it gets stood up. just because lots of new fans or idiots as i like to call them yap on about Lay n Pray doesn't mean anything. RASHAD HAD A BETTER GAME PLAN GET OVER IT.

 

look at randy's fight with tito for a wrestling classic' date=' or maTt hughes early fights. look at any fight that ended in vicious ground n pound or submissions.[/quote']

 

^ Approve this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nobody says oh people can't stand with great strikers so we should get rid of it' date=' Wrestling is about control and if you come into a fight against a great wrestler and aren't ready for it, then you deserve to lose. Its not a fighters job to choose his styles based on what his opponent can handle, It's up to both fighters to be prepared for everything the other guy has, [b']Hardy didn't train take down defense, Rampage went to wolfslair, they deserved to lose[/b]

 

are you serious? really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no. and i dissagree with most of what you said. back in the day wrestling was a much bigger problem than it is now. because most fighters had wrestling skills but nothing to back it up with. 90% of most fights where spent in a complete stalemate on the ground. no improving position no effective ground n pound and no submissions attempts.

 

nowadays its rare to see a stalemate on the ground and when you do it gets stood up. just because lots of new fans or idiots as i like to call them yap on about Lay n Pray doesn't mean anything. RASHAD HAD A BETTER GAME PLAN GET OVER IT.

 

look at randy's fight with tito for a wrestling classic' date=' or maTt hughes early fights. look at any fight that ended in vicious ground n pound or submissions.[/quote']

 

You just did not get my point l am saying "Watching fights like Forrest vs Bonnar or Chuck vs Tito got thousands more fans following MMA" Now do you think GSP vs Hardy or GSP vs Alves etc got any fans watching?. I have NO problem with wrestling that finishes fights what I mean is fights in which a better wrestler uses wrestling to take the fight to the ground and just do enough to keep it there and win the fight on points. Now Tito was a fighter who used wrestling but look at what he did when he got to the ground, He took chances to ground and pound his opponents out.....Brilliant. Do you now see the difference? MMA wrestling has evolved from Mark Coleman ground and pound winning UFC 10 and 11 to GSP and Koscheck etc wrestling for a points win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whenever i see fights alotta times ppl tackle other dude.. same thing in mma sometimes u just wanna hold a dude down and beat on him. ppl dont like losing cuz ther on the bottom . THEN GETT BETTER At STOPPING TAKEDOWNS!

 

Fail!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first started watching MMA wrestling was hardly an issue it was more BJJ vs Striking and it was damn exciting. Then it evolved and kept evolving to the point where MMA is a Wrestling DOMINATED sport and a lot of people find this kind of MMA boring like I do. Now my question is ' date='If MMA,s Growth can be traced back to the fights between Liddell vs Couture ,Liddell vs Ortiz, Ortiz vs Shamrock, Forrest vs Bonnar etc etc etc I cannot remember one wrestlefest becoming a classic match remembered by the masses or bringing in new fans. I am all for wrsetling in MMA but not to the extent where one fighter is happy to use wrestling to lay on top of their opponent for a points win. Now the question I ask [b']seriously[/b] is Will wrestling stop the growth of MMA Serious answers please and explanations why your opinion is what it is

 

I had a thread pretty much the opposite of this one. A lot of people are getting all riled up the second the match goes to the ground. The truth is wrestling has proven to be the great nuetralizer. Bjj and Strikers can easily lose their edge when a solid wrestler takes control. If a striker is getting controlled on the ground, he should have trained his ground game better: he's losing. If while he's losing, he ties up the wrestlers hands and whatnot, hindering the Ground and Pound, good for him, but he's still losing, and that does not mean the wrestler should not have wrestled. You fight to win. You fight to entertain fans, but not at the expense of a game plan to win.

 

I say Ban complaining about wrestlers, and tell your strikers to figure out how to win, to get off the ground, to reverse position on the ground, to win without being controlled for an entire match leading to threads like this one.

 

MMA is Mixed Martial Arts. You can not ban one because your attention span goes no further than a right hook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fail!!!!!!!!!

 

I think you fail here. He is right in saying if you dont like being held down and pounded out like Paul Daley v Josh Koscheck, learn some takedown defense and keep it where you want it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not a fighters job to choose his styles based on what his opponent can handle' date=' It's up to both fighters to be prepared for everything the other guy has, Hardy didn't train take down defense, Rampage went to wolfslair, they deserved to lose[/quote']

 

I agree with this. Every fighter is going to use the tools they have to win by any way they can. Its not the Wrestling thats the problem in my opinion, its the takedown defense and the inability of some fighters to scramble, sweep, hip escape or do whatever they need to do to regain their feet. I am pretty sure I remember jiu jitsu being pretty dominant early on in mma until people realized that to be successful they needed to learn it, or at least to defend it. Same situation here I think. Or maybe my NooB is showing

 

I am not a fan of Wolfslair either but I am a fan of Mr Jackson. I admit he was second best on the night, however I think he showed us enough, (considering the 400+ day layoff and all the other stuff) that we can assume that he has plenty more to give. I just hope he stays active and hungry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG Ranger, you're so new.

 

Wrestling has been around since day one in MMA, and dominated early (UFC anyway). You need to check yourself.

 

Wrestlers have always succeeded in MMA, from it's very beginning - many of whom became longstanding champions, and legends of the sport.

 

Just wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another note though, I do somewhat agree with you that wrestling will keep the sport from becoming iconic. There are only so many people who will thoroughly love every aspect to the sport, and I'm a firm believer that MMA has pretty much hit it's plateau.

 

If you turned the UFC into a striking only affair with 4 oz gloves and some rule changes, it wouldn't be MMA - but it would have the potential to reach levels that boxing once did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another note though' date=' I do somewhat agree with you that wrestling will keep the sport from becoming iconic. There are only so many people who will thoroughly love every aspect to the sport, and I'm a firm believer that MMA has pretty much hit it's plateau.

 

If you turned the UFC into a striking only affair with 4 oz gloves and some rule changes, it wouldn't be MMA - but it would have the potential to reach levels that boxing once did.[/quote']

 

One thing I dont understand about scoring a wrestler in MMA is - when Rashad went for the takedown and Rampage stopped it and ended up against the fence but Rashad kept on him - does Rampage get scored for TDD or Rashad for control? and should a ref (like Herb Dean was doing) break them up like a clinch in boxing when it is determined the take down has been defended?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I dont understand about scoring a wrestler in MMA is - when Rashad went for the takedown and Rampage stopped it and ended up against the fence but Rashad kept on him - does Rampage get scored for TDD or Rashad for control? and should a ref (like Herb Dean was doing) break them up like a clinch in boxing when it is determined the take down has been defended?

 

Who knows. The scoring in American MMA is garbage. Literally garbage. There is no rhyme or reason, and personally I think a fight should be judged on an overall level.

Takedowns mean jack squat in real MMA scoring unless you follow it up with offence. Somehow, takedowns have become worth more than almost knocking your opponent out here......it's embarassing.

 

I'd throw it out there that although Evans technically beat Page based on ludicrous scoring, in reality who really came closest to winning that fight? Page. He had Evans almost out, and that was the most punishment either fighter took. Another perspective anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG Ranger' date=' you're so new.

 

Wrestling has been around since day one in MMA, and dominated early (UFC anyway). You need to check yourself.

 

Wrestlers have always succeeded in MMA, from it's very beginning - many of whom became longstanding champions, and legends of the sport.

 

Just wow.[/quote']

 

I think he realises its always been dominent he is just talking about how it is being used is a bit different, fighters not trying to finnish the fight once they get control etc.

 

i agree with what a few other people have said in this thread i think this is just a bit of a transision stage where strikers will have to tune up on the wrestling skills and obviously that takes time. although alot of people don't like the tactics of gsp and recently rashad evans. imagine if we had divisions full of gsp's with a rounded skilll set all as good as him, the fights would be alot more entertaining and i think thats where mma is heading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who knows. The scoring in American MMA is garbage. Literally garbage. There is no rhyme or reason' date=' and personally I think a fight should be judged on an overall level.

Takedowns mean jack squat in real MMA scoring unless you follow it up with offence. Somehow, takedowns have become worth more than almost knocking your opponent out here......it's embarassing.

 

I'd throw it out there that although Evans technically beat Page based on ludicrous scoring, in reality who really came closest to winning that fight? Page. He had Evans almost out, and that was the most punishment either fighter took. Another perspective anyway.[/quote']

 

Scoring a fight as a whole is the key - once a fighter has the first 2 rounds (or 3 if its a championship fight) his oponent can really lay it on thick for the last rounds but it means nothing unless they sub or ko the guy

 

I noticed that takedowns are scored ridulously high in MMA, and I agree they mean nothing till some offence follows, a Muay Thai fighter wants to keep the fight on the feet for one reason - to land shots on his oponent, a BJJ practioner wants to take it to the ground to sub his oponent, there is still a bit of 'why did he take him down?' with some wrestlers.

 

Same happened with King Mo against Mousasi - Mousasi was controlled but looked confortable on his back - Lawal took all the damage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scoring a fight as a whole is the key - once a fighter has the first 2 rounds (or 3 if its a championship fight) his oponent can really lay it on thick for the last rounds but it means nothing unless they sub or ko the guy

 

I noticed that takedowns are scored ridulously high in MMA' date=' and I agree they mean nothing till some offence follows, a Muay Thai fighter wants to keep the fight on the feet for one reason - to land shots on his oponent, a BJJ practioner wants to take it to the ground to sub his oponent, there is still a bit of 'why did he take him down?' with some wrestlers.

 

Same happened with King Mo against Mousasi - Mousasi was controlled but looked confortable on his back - Lawal took all the damage[/quote']

 

Exactly.....there are some grey areas when it comes to effective wrestling and how it's scored in an MMA match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But then u could also make the argument that a takedown is effective wrestling because its a part of the art and if they complete it, it therefore is effective but like u guys are saying if u give the wrestler points for the takedown give the striker the same points for the tdd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But then u could also make the argument that a takedown is effective wrestling because its a part of the art and if they complete it' date=' it therefore is effective but like u guys are saying if u give the wrestler points for the takedown give the striker the same points for the tdd.[/quote']

 

Yeah but sometimes a fighter will be getting outstruck on the feet for 4 mins, clearly losing the round and the fighter losing will steal the round with 1 takedown, thats where it becomes unfair

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but sometimes a fighter will be getting outstruck on the feet for 4 mins' date=' clearly losing the round and the fighter losing will steal the round with 1 takedown, thats where it becomes unfair[/quote']

 

Yeah im not exactly sure on the points system but it does seem as if takedowns are worth way too much for what they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the only problem with wrestling in MMA is that MMA has not taken stalling in account. The same thing MMA fans call "wrestling is what as wrestlers we call stalling. In wrestling as a sport action is encouraged and inaction is penalized things like reverses and scrambling are what make a good wrestler. I understand what the OP is saying I just do't think enough people realize wrestling is not just laying on someone. UFC needs to adopt a stalling call to keep the fighters active.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just did not get my point l am saying "Watching fights like Forrest vs Bonnar or Chuck vs Tito got thousands more fans following MMA" Now do you think GSP vs Hardy or GSP vs Alves etc got any fans watching?. I have NO problem with wrestling that finishes fights what I mean is fights in which a better wrestler uses wrestling to take the fight to the ground and just do enough to keep it there and win the fight on points. Now Tito was a fighter who used wrestling but look at what he did when he got to the ground' date=' He took chances to ground and pound his opponents out.....Brilliant. Do you now see the difference? MMA wrestling has evolved from Mark Coleman ground and pound winning UFC 10 and 11 to GSP and Koscheck etc wrestling for a points win[/quote']

 

ridle me this then batman. what about stand up fights that go to a decision where the fighter who's winning doesn't really put everything into trying to finish the fight. their just as common as ground fights that go to decision. maybe stand up wars bring in more new fans. but for me GSP V hardy/alves where amazing fights. if more fights like that mean less idiots i say every fight should be go the same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first started watching MMA wrestling was hardly an issue it was more BJJ vs Striking and it was damn exciting. Then it evolved and kept evolving to the point where MMA is a Wrestling DOMINATED sport and a lot of people find this kind of MMA boring like I do. Now my question is ' date='If MMA,s Growth can be traced back to the fights between Liddell vs Couture ,Liddell vs Ortiz, Ortiz vs Shamrock, Forrest vs Bonnar etc etc etc I cannot remember one wrestlefest becoming a classic match remembered by the masses or bringing in new fans. I am all for wrsetling in MMA but not to the extent where one fighter is happy to use wrestling to lay on top of their opponent for a points win. Now the question I ask [b']seriously[/b] is Will wrestling stop the growth of MMA Serious answers please and explanations why your opinion is what it is

There sure is a lot of opinion in this thread supposedly about facts. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...